With all the talk of armed citizens being able to stop situations such as the last shooting, the media cant stand the thought of the gun world being right. They produce crap like this to prove to themselves and to their followers that gun owners really cant do anything to help the situation and really could cause more danger than good. It is the lefts view to cower down and run and not fight back. They put inexperienced people in a situation where the shooter knows exactly who has the gun in the classroom and therefore he goes right to that person every time. In a real situation, in all the confusion and scattering, the gunman wouldnt have a clue who was armed and who wasnt and if he did see a gun pulled out against him he would run for the door.

Click to expand...

Ya, that's exactly right. The scenario should have had an inexperienced individual come in with a gun that had no knowledge of who was armed. The outcome would be different I'm sure. However, that is why they didn't do it that way I'm sure.

With all the talk of armed citizens being able to stop situations such as the last shooting, the media cant stand the thought of the gun world being right. They produce crap like this to prove to themselves and to their followers that gun owners really cant do anything to help the situation and really could cause more danger than good. It is the lefts view to cower down and run and not fight back. They put inexperienced people in a situation where the shooter knows exactly who has the gun in the classroom and therefore he goes right to that person every time. In a real situation, in all the confusion and scattering, the gunman wouldnt have a clue who was armed and who wasnt and if he did see a gun pulled out against him he would run for the door.

Click to expand...

What would have happened if the trained cop was sitting in the classroom, and one of the enexperienced students was told to go into the class room and shoot as many as possible? In the real world the shooter is almost never proficent with the guns he is using. I said almost! Put a student in that class room, who is trained, and the whole thing gets turned around!

What would have happened if the trained cop was sitting in the classroom, and one of the enexperienced students was told to go into the class room and shoot as many as possible? In the real world the shooter is almost never proficent with the guns he is using. I said almost! Put a student in that class room, who is trained, and the whole thing gets turned around!

Click to expand...

Yea, and even an untrained person would have a chance at taking the shooter out. For one thing, the shooter wouldnt know anyone in the room was armed. For a second thing, the shooter would take out the immediate threat in front of him, not the random person in the crowd. The person that is given the gun was set up to fail, plain and simple. It just would not likely have went down that way in a real life situation. And like was already said, what bad guy trains for this situation? None. His likelyhood of failure is very high. He wont be trained or proficient with a handgun and will most likely cower down and run for his life if met with resistance. While we dont know that for sure, its highly likely. I am sick and tired of these liberals and their sissy nature. What a bunch of whimps.

"I am sick and tired of these liberals and their sissy nature. What a bunch of whimps."--DD

Dadgummit [paraphrased for the rating]
Maybe the water supply should have been filled with Clorox
instead of flouride a couple of generations ago.....
how in the world do so many of these igmo-sapiens keep
propagating.......
The gene pool is nasty.....it stinks to high heaven.......
POUR IN A TRIPLE DOSE OF CHEMICALS ASAP....!!

This vicious thing- I tell my wife all the time, if she's attacked, the gun doesn't stop the threat, she's gotta do things like scratch/puncture his eyeballs if she can. She cringes when I try and explain, but you and skullfr are so right. A woman (you know, anybody) has to be as brutal as the attacker, and really seriously try and push or gouge his eyeballs right out of his head, not just poke him like on of the 3 Stooges. Rape, severe beatings, death, these possibilities demand that kind of savage response.

amd this was supposed to quote aaa1911's post, don't know why the 'quick reply to quote' didn't work

if people know that a significant amount of people are armed, they won't go nuts and shoot the place up in the first place!! unless they're suicidal of course... suicide by cop, suicide by armed citizens, whatever. I think just knowing most people are armed will deter most of these whackos

Click to expand...

More people are armed.....that's why I think we should file class-action suits when things like the Batman movie shooting occur. If 3, 4, 5 people had been armed- even if they only saved one life- better than what happened. If a theater, restaurant, whatever says 'No Concealed Carry" then they are telling the BGs this is the place to rob. With everybody else suing for STUPID stuff, we should sue when these things happen. They intentionally endangered our lives, even use the 2nd Amendment saying they had no right to prevent me being armed.

I've been proposing that for a while and completely agree ^^, if some place posts 'no guns allowed' then they should be legally liable for any personal damage if some nut comes in and shoots the place. I bet those signs would come down faster than a lead balloon.

that would be a nice law... sure.. you can, as the prop, owner, declare gun (protection) free.. but then you are 100% liable for all damages and injuries relating to events where having your carry gun MAY have helped the situation.

I didn't say a law, by the way. I said we should file suit, if we are injured in the situation. This type of action is used to stop bad practices. Even if all someone won in the suit was medical expenses, it would sure make business owners stop and think before posting that sign. In fact, even if the suit was lost the owners would have that expense, and we know that we are concerned about legitimately shooting someone, for fear of being sued.

I have shot enough and trained doing so that if I raise my pistol, any pistol where I look is where the sights are. Fast sighting is not because I am that good. It is MUSCLE MEMORY.

With training it becomes automatic. That is why JERRY MICULIK is acurate even though his speed is blazing. His muscles remember. Contrary to the lib, anti gun anti military bozos, the Military does not make robots. The training is so that even under stress most can do what is needed automatically. Load, fire, clear a jamb, with everything going on around you your body does what it remembers even if your brain is busy.

Learn to shoot Point Shooting, putting night sights on your pistol looks pretty, but where the muzzle points the bullet should go. When PS become automatic, your eyes are already moving to the next threat even as you pull the trigger. Target shooting and nice groups are great but be able to hit a target wihtout the sights or offhanded. Plinking and aiming I can hit a golf ball 25 feet away, PS at 25 feet I can always hit a target. It aint dead center but it is on target.

At a range told Brother in law with his SW 357 to aim for the shoulder hit 3 of 4. Same gun I hit 4 of 4 PS never shot his pistol. As I said it is train, train, train. Had an instructor that said Rifle sights are needed. Pistol sights are not. You need to be aware of your surroundings, analyze the threats PS is fast when your muscles remember.